Building with a small budget feasible?

If you have nothing else in reserve (severance pay, inheritance, funds, stocks, capital life insurance, other real estate, etc.), that is extremely short-sighted and, to put it mildly, stupid. We all know how well this other financing model worked in the US. Real estate does not only go up in value, so a sale at any time with a guaranteed profit is not ensured. Unless we are talking about a prime location and you do not care about keeping the total repayment amount relatively low.

No, that is not stupid for everyone. Because for most people a falling price can be completely irrelevant. If I live in my house until I die, its price is totally irrelevant to me. This is also not comparable with the USA, where people are much more mobile and usually buy several houses in their lifetime because they move more often. This model only becomes problematic if you want or have to sell, and then the price drops extremely. And of course, with this model you have to secure long-term financing.

It's impressive how new possibilities are constantly being explored to make property acquisition suitable for even the smallest budgets and to keep fueling the eternal boom...
After all, the house ages and will later require investments. How is that supposed to work if the 70-year-old owner is still repaying the loan?

One can only hope that most banks stay true to their principles and don't play along with such antics. Eventually, there has to be an end.

Matter of opinion, I think it's good if there is suitable financing for everyone who can afford it.

For anyone who can carry it....that's the point. But those who finance it like that actually cannot carry it.

For everyone who can afford to carry it....that's the point. But whoever finances it like that, they actually can't afford to carry it.

If you have the requirement that the house is paid off by retirement or death, maybe not. But you can also let go of that idea. It is not a disaster if that's not the case. As I said, the installment must of course lead to a repayment, it must cover more than just the interest.

Matter of opinion, I think it’s good if there is suitable financing for everyone who can carry it.

To structure the repayment plan based on income until far into retirement because there is no other way and at the same time believe that later one can skim off repayment and investment reserves from their pension is an obvious contradiction. Those who have to finance this way will probably not have a pension in retirement from which this will be easily possible.
In this case, the retiree as a tenant is clearly better off in old age, even if they still have to pay rent, but do not have to worry much about heating, roof, windows, etc.
The result of too many tight financings is then later even more of these old-people houses with massive investment backlog than we already have today.

The result of too many tight financings later on is even more of these old-people houses with massive investment backlogs, than we already have today.

Yes, so what? If the person living in it feels comfortable there, that's not a problem. Then it will simply be renovated later. Not everyone has to live in a hyper-modern high-tech house.

But whatever, such models exist, everyone has to decide for themselves what they feel comfortable with. And a thousand other reasons also lead to divorce. If someone's marriage fails because of finances, their marriage was not good anyway and would have failed for other reasons.